Boards

Can we all now just agree that he is the best player in football history?

He just keeps producing jaw dropping moments, his goalscoring stats are outrageous, he hardly ever gets injured (even though he plays a crazy amount of games) he doesn't cheat or dive and he is amazingly consistent... Oh and he scored this in the Spanish cup final last night...

about how Brazilians have always thought Garrincha was the better player, and this whole Pele think is 70% marketing and the fact he's always sold himself to anyone willing to pay and 30% people only seeing him at world cups, where he did a few tricks.

I've only ever watched Messi for Argentina, or against Chelsea, and he's always been middling shades of mediocre to shite in the games I've seen.
don't doubt he's brilliant etc in literally every other game and that this is very, very limited experience of his playing career, but I'm pretty sure I've never watched a match in which he's looked any good ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Larsson was vastly underrated for the majority of his career because he spent his best years in Scotland.

He was a genuine world class talent and all round good guy. Don't just take my word for it...

"When he came to Barcelona, Henrik said nice things about me but by the time he left he was my idol. In fact, he was my idol even before that. I remember him playing for Sweden in the 1994 World Cup. Henrik taught me a lot about football and I learned even more from him as a person. I was disappointed that he left for Sweden because I would have loved to have played with him for longer. Now United will benefit from his experience and knowledge. They are incredibly lucky. He is still in incredibly good shape and could carry on playing at the highest level for a long time."

Ronaldinho

"He had an incredible season. I had no option but to give him 10 out of 10. He always went about his job in the right way. He spent time on the bench but never once did he moan. His whole demeanour was admirable and when he was given his chance he took it. I can only be impressed by Larsson as a person and a player. He is 35 but he runs around like a 20-year-old. It was a shame he did not stay as he still has a lot to give at the highest level."

Julio Salinas

"People always talk about Ronaldinho, and everything but I didn't see him today - I saw Henrik Larsson. Two times he came on - he changed the game, that is what killed the game - sometimes you talk about Ronaldinho and Eto'o and people like that, you need to talk about the proper footballer who made the difference and that was Henrik Larsson tonight."

Thierry Henry

"We all know Henrik is a quality player. I have said before I think he is the best Scandinavian player since Michael Laudrup"

Ole Gunnar Solskjaer

“Over my career I have played against some of the best strikers there has ever been. Both Ronaldos, Roberto Baggio, Zlatan Ibrahimovic – and I can honestly say Larsson is not out of place in those names. I faced him against Celtic and Sweden and he was a player to fear, he was very special. Celtic got his best years and I am sure the fans will always remember how fantastic it was to have one of the best players in the world for so many seasons.”

"I'm selfish, impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best"

la liga is so much better than the premier league it's not even debatable. There are a few shitters in the bottom half but probably every top half la liga team would beat its corresponding team in the PL

it's a two-horse race with an occasional challenge from one of the 2nd tier sides every now and then e.g. Atletico last year. The two clubs with the money have all the power. The relative strengths of the teams v other leagues is irrelevant

just found his overall performances pretty mediocre. it's quite possible he played better than that but the weight of expectation and hype around him made his play seem totally average to me. there was absolutely no way he should've been named player of the tournament though.

made people view his tournament as worse than it was. Like, he wasn't the best player (that was hammez) but he was probably third (after hammers & robben) and the only standout individual who got to the final (maybe Neuer & Masch too)

But not sure he could have done that much more. He scored some extraordinary goals at important times when the rest of his team was underperforming and he was constantly being marked by 2 or 3 players while doing so.

*Adidas-sponsored player wins Adidas-sponsored award though - over to you, FBI!

which usually result in goals. Ronaldo (the current one) is more of a powerhouse hence views like Alex Fergusons that you could put Ronaldo in the Scunthorpe team and they'd win whereas less so with Messi.

and that Messi is easily the better player (I think only Man U / Real Madrid / Portugal fans would disagree).

BUT you can see his point. Ronaldo would be more effective than Messi in a shitter team. i.e. Messi flash of unbelievable brilliance, lays of ball to Cameron Jerome = no goal. Ronaldo double step over, look up, charge, no passing (too selfish), shoots = goal.

Ronaldo scores loads of penalties and tap ins (obviously not saying that's all he scores) but I'd argue that Messi is more capable of making something for himself. Don't forget that Ronaldo is getting service from Isco, Hamez, Modric, Kroos etc.

The way Ronaldo plays now, he's not as good as he was a couple of years ago. He scores a shed load but his all round play hasn't been all that special when I've watched him.

ronaldo is just a wide poacher who can do a few stepovers. Don't understand how he'd make shit teams more better than messi would. The headed goals from corners aren't gonna make up the difference from messi's endless dribbles followed by chipping the keeper

but he maximises a few specific skills (which are basically all the boring ones) rather than just being great at everything. A lot of the stuff you'd expect one of the best players in the world to be good at (i.e. dribbling, passing etc) are skills he doesn't have a world class ability in.

yeah, anyway, I love the way Zizou moved the ball. almost like Jairzinho (best Brazilian imo), kind of languid and leggy, the ball would be there and gone and you'd swear he wasn't even moving that quickly. used to run games by himself, too, and scored so many amazing goals.

this sort of thread does bring out some very stupid soundbites. Like, everyone knows Messi & Ronaldo are the 2 best in the world, yet in a thread like this, as an attempt to distinguish between them and explain why Messi's comfortably better. people can say pure bumhat like 'ronaldo is just a wide poacher who can do a few stepovers'

is that people elevate 'top top top' players' talent to a higher level than they actually are. Ronaldo's stats are obviously ridiculous but that's all his game is geared towards (brutal efficiency, as ant says). Which is essentially the hallmark of a poacher, no? Poachers can be great players but they're never the heartbeat of a team or w/e (don't know what my point is here but ther is one i reckon). Also Zidane was a genius but i'm not convinced he was so much better than other great playmakers of that era (eg bergkamp, obviously).

That's sort of why i think messi's unique cos so much ridiculous stuff gets said about him and it's not even hyperbole.

it's more that the players we elevate as in that way (i.e. zidane, ronaldinho etcc) i don't think were THAT much better than the players slightly below them (eg bergkamp). I think even ronaldo, although his stats are absurd, is at least on a relatable level to some other top players out there. Whereas messi's just out there on his own in basically every department, and really does deserve the 'star treatment' we give him or w/e. In other words it's not just a marketing thing, or our desire to have identifiable individual heroes like i'd argue it is with others (more complicated than that but this isnt sociology)

this thread manages to come out on top of most insane of all time. Ronaldo: "does a few stepovers" Messi: "Wouldnt improve every team in the world" Pele: "Not that good" Theyre all fucking brilliant, I literally have no idea what everyones on about.

World Cup every 4 years, European cup/champions league is an annual event so a player can get many more chances to win it, so winning the World Cup will always be held in higher regard.

Also for how amazing Messi undoubtedly is, he will be forever remembered for bottling it in the final and missing that sitter unless he wins the next world cup for Argentina, it's weird really as I reckon if he gets the exact same chance in the exact same position for Barca in the final vs Juventus he'll bury it, maybe even for Messi who has achieved practically everything there is to achieve at club level it was too much pressure.

plus he got badly injured when he had his best chance to win it in his Barca days. Messi has been fortunate to have played throughout his career in one of the greatest teams ever, Maradona never played in one of the the greatest teams ever and football was a more level playing field when he played.

It's silly to compare players from different era really, Maradona probably wouldn't have got his serious injury had he played in the modern era where tackling is more strictly governed and there is more protection for attacking players, also football is more scientific now so imagine how good a super-fit Maradona would have been, also imagine how good he could have been in the modern day Barcelona team?

it is much more difficult to win now.
now all the best teams are in it- top four, three, two from each league. then, the uefa cup was just as hard to win with say three teams from spain and only one in the European cup.
also for most of maradona's time, no English teams were in the European cup- the most successful nation leading up to the ban.
that "much" in your statement has done me.
barcelona are one of the greatest teams of all time because messi plays for them, it's silly to talk him down because of their success.
barca without messi against Bayern- 0 7 for example and beating them by two goals with him.
it's not like maradona played with mugs- careca was one of the best then.

so almost every game you played was high pressure, realistically now you can lose 3 group games and still go through to knock out stage. Also back then football was less scientific, pitches weren't as good, the ball itself wasn't as good, fitness levels not what they are now etc etc. You can't really compare the 1970s / 1980s to the game now, it's a completely different game now, different rules, more protection for attackers for starters, when Maradona played you got assaulted by the opposition defenders on a weekly basis, none of that happens now.

Modern football is undoubtedly to the benefit of the attackers, in the past it was to the benefit of the defenders.

I'm not knocking Messi, he's undoubtedly an amazing player, quite possibly the greatest ever... yawn this is a very silly debate really.

in the 1990/91 season Napoli beat ujpesti dozsa 5-0 over two legs. this season the Italian champions, juventus had to finish above either athletico Madrid or olympiacos to qualify for knockouts. I think Napoli had it easier there.
in the twenty three champions leagues, no one has ever retained the cup. in the twenty three European cups preceding it, there were seven retentions. you really think it was harder to win then?
I agree the attackers are protected more now, but the defenders are fitter now as well.